Author
Abstract
Purpose - This paper aims to discuss the role of accounting, accountants and the cash management processes of indigenous Māori and Pacific (collectively referred as Polynesian) entrepreneurs in New Zealand. Design/methodology/approach - A qualitative research methodology was used; 43 in-depth face-to-face interviews were conducted with Polynesian entrepreneurs, key informants, business experts and accountants to align with the oral Polynesian traditions and protocols. Findings - The paper highlights the influence of cultural values on Polynesians’ accounting decision-making processes. It also provides some unique insights into the interrelationships of the cultural, economic and social dynamics that sculpt Polynesians’ decisions towards accounting, cash management and their accountants. Research limitations/implications - Purposive sampling of a small sample was drawn from Auckland, New Zealand. Though statistical generalisability is not possible, in-depth interview data provided rich and contextual evidence which are often missing from a quantitative research approach. Practical implications - It highlights the need for contextualised accounting services to Polynesian entrepreneurs by the accounting profession. It also calls for more cultural sensitivity when servicing and regulating Polynesian entrepreneurs. Originality/value - This study identifies some unique insights into the interrelationships of culture, economic and social dynamics in Polynesian entrepreneurs. In particular, the cultural values of communality, reciprocity and “gift-giving” and respect for authority are important factors in shaping the Polynesians’ approach to accounting disposition and business cash management. It also identifies the power differentials between Polynesian entrepreneurs and their accountants, in which the former takes on a subordinate role to the latter.
Suggested Citation
Sue Yong, 2019.
"Pride or prejudice: accounting and Polynesian entrepreneurs,"
Pacific Accounting Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(2), pages 182-207, March.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:parpps:par-10-2017-0084
DOI: 10.1108/PAR-10-2017-0084
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:parpps:par-10-2017-0084. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.